Quoting: PandB
The way I see it is broberg for Manson, and then two firsts for Gibbs. Koski balances books and the 3rd is two help balance what I feel is a slight overpay in each "trade" mentioned above. What needs to happen instead?
Let's put aside the fact that "Koskinen balances the books" is a solution for YOUR problems, not ours, so he's not a plus for us.
You're approaching this from the point of view of what YOU want to pay for Gibson. Instead, you should look at this from the PoV of the team who's trading him away.
Gibson solves the question of who we start in goal for the majority of our games
for the next six years. To put some perspective on that number, note that McDavid's and Draisaitl's contracts will have expired by then, as will every other current contract you have except for Nugent-Hopkins'. Consider that seriously for a moment.
Anaheim has three major weaknesses: (1) lack of scoring talent in general; (2) lack of quality at RW; and (3) lack of quality at RD. Trading Gibson to address just one of those problem areas is foolish because creating a hole in net to cure a hole somewhere else is just playing whack-a-mole because unlike Las Vegas or the Islanders, we don't have a guy to step right in to replace Gibson. So any trade for Gibson has to at least offer the hope of filling two of those holes. So something along the lines of Holloway or Yamamoto, Bouchard and your 2022 first would be reasonable. Now add in the value of one year of Josh Manson, which is roughly a second and a good prospect (i.e., what Ristolainen SHOULD have gotten), and you have what we think is fair value for that duo.
PandB liked this.
Reply
CapFriendly
CapFriendly